Desensitization

There has always been bad things, bad individuals in society. Only thing thats changed is 24 hr news and things like modern media, internet, mobile phones etc... People are just more aware of these isues now.

 

You most certainly could say things are depraved. But your actual judgement would be entirely worthless and hollow without an objective principle if you were to follow the philosophy of the world as it is today. Let me ask you... if morality has to adjust to the times and modern man, why is it so inconceivable to you that such a philosophy could eventually lead to the acceptance by society of things that you right now consider to obviously depraved?

I have no doubt that you have met many better people than I. And I am far from a brilliant Catholic. I may know the ins and outs of Catholic teaching, but were will that knowledge avail me when I stand before the seat of His Judgement?

I have to object to this as a gross mischaracterisation.

 

Why? Basic, innate morality and complex, deep-rooted social contracts.

Cool.

 

And you think it is impossible for man to overcome such things? Or that it would be impossible for human society as a whole to discard them? I mean we already know there are many individuals that do not have any semblance of morality. Sociopaths, for example. And the social contract theory would essentially only apply to the subjugated. What need of the social contract if you have the power to safeguard and protect yourself? And incidentally social contract theory only goes so far. It does not state what is right and what is wrong, simply that men will conduct themselves to social norms for their own self-preservation. Your argument is that innate morality would assure a general consensus of what is moral and immoral throughout all of human society, but we know that to be wrong.

 

No, I don't. Just as it's not impossible for a man to overcome objective morality. Objective morality is no more a safe guard.


Sociopathy is a personality disorder. I assumed we were talking about everyday people who do not suffer from sociopathy. Any notion of a significant number of the world's population suffering from sociopathy is the stuff of dystopian fantasy and doesn't deserve any more entertainment than speculation about a zombie apocalypse.

Perhaps I wasn't clear what I meant by social contract. I wasn't referring to the legitimacy of government; I meant an agreement between individuals and the people around them to act to their mutual benefit. This exists in egalitarian societies. It's an unwritten rule that you shouldn't kill me and I shouldn't kill you; you shouldn't steal from me, I shouldn't steal from you, etc. If those rules are broken, the perpetrator is cast out from society. It's in people's interests to stay alive and to prosper.

 

North makes a good point though. Some people have enough power to live outwith the boundaries of behaviour that the social contract sets. Likewise, some people live within it whilst seeking to exploit its rules and laws for their own gain. It's a moral code in the most practical sense but it assumes an equity in society that just doesn't exist. What society today is truly egalitarian when economic and political systems benefit the few over that of the many? Would it be any better if democracy worked correctly and the majority dictated the state of affairs to the few?

Also, the above is only true for one social unit. It all falls down when you meet another unit with different ideas to yours. Then you get the uneasy balance between cooperation and conflict that has plagued every human society since history began.

All in all, it's not much of an improvement on Judeo-Christian morality, and in practice it isn't much different in terms of what they actually espouse, it's just more incoherent and far less convincing.

 

A lot of deep stuff going on in here

 

if anything the western views on things in general are getting more liberal. Governments, not so much but there's a reason we are more horrified by things like this rather than some places in Africa and so on. They see this stuff on a daily basis which in essence makes people have less empathy towards human life after seeing it on a daily basis. Which the cartel do for that exact reason. To show how cheap life is. But even in Mexico with these surroundings, not everyone is a cold heart killer because they see death laying on the streets every other night.

Places in Africa make kids execute their own mother with a gun pointed at their heads.

the thing about what the OP's getting at is, our life already has all this stuff available for people to see weather its a documentary, on the news or just simply looking it up on the normal internet we all have. Our kids of the future are already exposed to it.

but even people from places were murder is exposed to the daily, not all of the people from that community become cold hearted killers them selves. The problem usually lies in kids idolizing those people so weather its the internet or keeping your kid from seeing dead bodies out in the street every night, the problem is young kids immature minds that need protected. Hense why in America where guns are so easy for kids to get, they have a troubled childhood, they get a gun from their dads drawer and they go shoot up schools.

so basically, save the children :smiley-laughing002:

 

There's a difference between watching the atrocities of war or a public execution and watching stuff like 3 * 1 hammer. Public executions have been popular not because it's fun to watch someone die, but because the audience got the feeling that their own norms and morals was confirmed and the diviants were rightfully punished.
* who watch snuff does it for entertainment and for being bad *.
I don't watch it cus it has nothing positive to offer me. A public execution of a paedophile would be worth watching though.

 

I agree, good point mate!

 

Do you have any examples? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm genuinely curious.

I don't agree with you. By saying the world is * up you're suggesting most people or even a sizeable number of people find people murdering and torturing each other to be acceptable or at least watchable. What percentage of people on earth have killed and/or tortured other people for the sake of it? An absolutely tiny percentage. If you see lots of violent stuff you're bound to end up with a stronger stomach to cope with it which could be handy, but on emotional level there's nothing useful about being able to cope well with that stuff and I don't think it makes you "weak" if you can't.

I heard about the Dynipro video years ago and managed to avoid it, curiosity got the better of me this time round. I've never cried watching a film but I almost felt like it watching that. The day stuff like that doesn't bother me is a bad day for me.

 

the real problems for people in the world that are exposed to that sort of stuff. Its when they leave that type of enviroment. Can imagine it would be like leaving the army. Your kinda used to the stuff when soldiers are over there n see that * but as soon as they're in a civil society, your mind starts reminding you that stuff. which then haunts you for the rest of your life. I'm sure people in those countries get PTSD aswell. So imo, no one can get used to that. We know its wrong in our society so it will eat away at you.

 

I don't think everyone's a * or murderer, but I think everyone has the potential to do great evil. I think a rapist, murderer and overall outright * lurks under the surface of near enough everyone. All it needs is the right circumstances. In largely lawless situations, like wars, people act in vicious ways that they wouldn't in normal situations. And I think with the way society is today, where people can remain largely aloof and relatively anonymous to each other, people can afford to be more callous than ever. Youtube comments are always given as an example. Always full of absolute thundercunts being racist, homophobic, abusive to each other, people who are probably very pleasant to others in day to day life. Bottom line, never expect people to act altruistically and you'll never be disappointed.

 

Saw a documentary about Elizabeth Bathory recently and she did all this long before tinternet or 24 hour news.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_B%C3%A1thory"]Elizabeth Báthory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

I would say one obvious example would be films. Films nowadays are far more graphic than they were in the 80's or even the 90's. When the Exorcist came out in the 1970's there had to be paramedics on standby in some cinemas because people were so affected by it. The Clockwork Orange was banned for many years because of the rape scenes in it. Like I said, these two films would barely raise an eyebrow if they were released now.

I think fighting and violence has got worse too. It now seems to be an accepted part of fighting that if you get the other guy down on the ground it's ok to kick him in the head and even stamp on his head. Whatever it takes to keep him down. It's not enough to knock somebody down anymore you have to kick the absolute * out of them until they can't get up again. I don't know when that kicking in the head * started but it's * evil. I'd say people are more prone to using weapons nowadays too but I don't have any statistics to back that up, that's just my feeling.

 

yeah.............:smiley-laughing002:

I have never felt the need to watch any of that kind of thing.....I wouldn't even watch Braveheart! Life has been brutal throughout history and it would seem that things haven't changed much. I know most of us would like to view ourselves as civilised human beings and perhaps its the more "civilised" we're supposed to have become that makes us more sensitive to such things.

There's too much badness/evil in the world and sometimes I think that the end of time can't come soon enough for a planet such as ours. It's always the weak and the innocents that come off worst.

 

I think people are capable of doing pretty evil things when they don't know their actions or evil, ie killing people in wars when they genuinely believe they're fighting for good. I disagree that we're all capable of pointless rape/murder. You could talk about people who get abused doing it to others much more than others, but that would lead to a whole other debate about whether our personalities are innate or a result of circumstance.

There's absolutely tonnes of people leaving insulting comments on Youtube but they don't represent most people. Maybe if an experiment was done and everyone was to witness horrifying events, the types who abuse people on Facebook would be the first to turn "evil".

In terms of fiction, you're definitely right. I'm still not sure that has as big an affect on actual society as people think though. I was born in 1989 so I will have experienced a lot more violence in films at a young age than my parents (I also saw The Exorcist at a young age and laughed at most of it when it terrified my mum when she first saw it years ago). However, the first time I saw violence in real life I was shocked and disturbed by it the same as a young person in the 70's would be, and as I said last night I felt sick watching that Dnipro video. No violent films will change that.

I can't comment on your last point as me and nobody I know goes round getting in to fights (which itself tells a story about whether we all live in a violent society). Hearing about things like football hooliganism and gang violence in Edinburgh/Glasgow back in the day would suggest to me that it's always existed.

 

To an extent I'd say you're not the only one. Reason I say to an extent is because I've really only seen one video that I remember which is the Budd Dwyer one. Many of them I can't bring myself to watch, but I've seen stills and read about the incidents.

I consider myself to have a strong stomach but I can't bring myself to watch any videos like 3 Guys 1 Hammer, the Mexican Chainsaw Beheading or the Russian murderers who seem to be copycats of the sick * in the 3 Guys video for instance. Curiosity does eat away at me but I never give in to it because I know I wouldn't be able to watch it.

As for the OP, I wouldn't say that these sorts of sick, disturbing acts will really ever become the norm. At least I do hope not. Sick * like this has probably really always gone on and I think we just read and see more about them because of the world of the internet and the amount of social media there is now. I guess it depends on the actual individual, but I don't think things like this will ever really make us desensitised to watching them.

 

I think fiction can affect people, particularly the young. Computer games would be another example. Like films, they're so much more graphic than they used to be and the subject matter of some of the popular games these days really isn't appropriate for children. The games do come with age certificates on them but how many parents adhere to them? If a 12-13yo lad wants Grand Theft Auto to play on his new Xbox then in most cases he's gonna get it. Some people scoff when it is said that computer games can affect children's behaviour but I believe it can desensitise them to violence.

 

I think while media has become more violent over the last couple of generations, we are actually a very protected collective compared to almost any other time in history. Before the 2nd half of the 20th century, violence surrounded normal life at every level. People died young in warfare, and if they didn't they certainly would have known people and family members who did. More people died of disease and of poverty and general violence and blood shed was a lot closer to normal life than it is today. In todays society, many of us actually have any exposure to real violence, danger, or even death outside of our characters on computer games.

I don't believe people are any more moral or immoral than in the past and I don't think we really have a radically different attitude to violence as we used to. The fact video game and movie violence is seen as such a significant issue actually goes to show how far removed most of us are from genuinely threat in our lives.